Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=NC_Skins;804502]No way no how. They in fact locked their own income out by their own doing. There is no way in hell they could make a claim like that. Their revenue loss is squarely on their own accord.[/quote]

Ok, I'm not totally up on all the leagaleeze. lol. But I was just wondering could the Owners point out that had the Players not done what they did the Lockout would not have happened and because of that could the Owners request damage?

I can for some reason see the owners pointing this out talking about how some fans failed to renew their tickets because of not knowing what was going to happen with the lockout... basically causing damage.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;804500]Just watching NFL Network and god I'm soo tired of yet another owner or CEO or whoever saying .... " We need to get back to the negotiations table." So what is the problem? It seems that the owners are all saying we need to get to the negotiations table and everytime I hear from the players side it's all about whatever happens June 3rd or June 6th.

So why can't the Players tell their reps to get at the table and keep trying? I mean if they are cable of getting something done then all the law suits could be dropped.

Damn players. ;)[/quote]

It does appear that the players are begining to lose the PR battle. DeMaurice Smith doesn't seem to be winning them any good favor with his rhetoric and perceived indignance...while the NFL mantra has been "we need to get back to the table".

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=Son Of Man;804504]It does appear that the players are begining to lose the PR battle. DeMaurice Smith doesn't seem to be winning them any good favor with his rhetoric and perceived indignance...while the NFL mantra has been "we need to get back to the table".[/quote]

No. The NFL mantra has been this.


[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6585190]Buffalo Bills suspend pension and 401K payments to employees - ESPN[/url]

[url=http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/29531432]NFL Shop raises jersey prices $5 amid lockout - CBSSports.com[/url]

[url=http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2010-05-11-ticket-prices-mainbar_N.htm]Get ready to pay: 18 NFL teams raising ticket prices for 2010 - USATODAY.com[/url]

****ing over the fans, screwing over their employees, so they can make yet more money so that they can misuse under the guise of their "operating expenses" and then turn around and claim their are having "profit losses".

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;804503]I can for some reason see the owners pointing this out talking about how some fans failed to renew their tickets because of not knowing what was going to happen with the lockout... basically causing damage.[/quote]


It's about as retarded as a robber suing a home owner for a faulty window that broke and cut him while he was trying to break into the house.

Doesn't make sense does it? Didn't think so.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=NC_Skins;804506]****ing over the fans, screwing over their employees, so they can [B]make yet more money so that they can misuse under the guise of their "operating expenses"[/B] and then turn around and claim their are having "profit losses".[/quote]

I would be interested to view your proof on this statement.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=NC_Skins;804507]It's about as retarded as a robber suing a home owner for a faulty window that broke and cut him while he was trying to break into the house.

Doesn't make sense does it? Didn't think so.[/quote]

But... stupid itshay like this does happen. I hear all the time about husbands filing suit against the wife because by doing so they can get paid by the home owners insurance. How about a robber who files suit against the home owner after the home owner shoots the robber? Better yet the home owner getting arrested because the robber was shot in the back leaving the residence and killed?

But I still think you gave a bad example. A better example would be had you not been drinking and driving then you might have had control of your vehicle and not ran the oncoming vehicle off the road injuring one passenger or both. It's all about the first event. Had the players not filed their intent then the owners would not have locked out. All the revenue lost could be attributed to the players filing their intent.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=NC_Skins;804506]No. The NFL mantra has been this.


[URL="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6585190"]Buffalo Bills suspend pension and 401K payments to employees - ESPN[/URL]

[URL="http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/29531432"]NFL Shop raises jersey prices $5 amid lockout - CBSSports.com[/URL]

[URL="http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2010-05-11-ticket-prices-mainbar_N.htm"]Get ready to pay: 18 NFL teams raising ticket prices for 2010 - USATODAY.com[/URL]

****ing over the fans, screwing over their employees, so they can make yet more money so that they can misuse under the guise of their "operating expenses" and then turn around and claim their are having "profit losses".[/quote]

Lets not stop to think that maybe the owners might, just might be experiencing a reduction in income due to this whole mess that the owners need to find a way to keep the right amount of money flow coming in to the business to pay said employees, or reduce employees pay by a % to enable them to keep their jobs.

Yep it's all the owners fault. Damn owners. If they would just lift the lockout then fans would be happy and throw the money they don't have due to the bad economy at season tickets, the owners wouldn't have to raise jeresy costs, and employees wouldn't have to worry about their jobs or a reduction in their pay.

Stick it to the owners players and stand your ground. Hold out and wait to hear what the 8th Circuit decides.

When you need a job you go out and apply to 15 to 20 different places in hopes a few respond. You don't go out and apply to one place and wait and when you don't get it you go out and apply to another place and wait, so on and so on. See while the players are so called waiting.... they could be sitting at a table with the owners trying to work something out. What I'd like to see is the owners pick a date and time. The players don't show up its on them, because I'm almost certain the players don't want to negotiate. They want to hear what the 8th Circuit says first or atleast win having the lockout lifted then they will be all over "lets get together."

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;804516]Had the players not filed their intent then the owners would not have locked out. All the revenue lost could be attributed to the players filing their intent.[/quote]


DOT DOT DOT


The first incident in this is the Owners opting out of the CBA. You conveniently forgot the most important detail. They are the cause, not the players bro.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=NC_Skins;804518]DOT DOT DOT


The first incident in this is the Owners opting out of the CBA. You conveniently forgot the most important detail. They are the cause, not the players bro.[/quote]

I think your forgetting that although most of us know the owners were opting out, the CBA didn't expire prior to the intent? Last I remember there was agreed upon extensions in order to work out a deal, 6 hrs prior to the CBA expiring the Union filed their intent or decertified. It doesn't matter what we think would have happened it's a matter of what actually happened. The players decertified 6 hrs prior to the deadline. So the first event was the players fault not the owners, even though we all can guess had the CBA expired with out an agreement we all could blame both sides for not getting it done. Then had the owners locked out we could point the finger at the owners as being the first event.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;804522]The players decertified 6 hrs prior to the deadline. So the first event was the players fault not the owners[/quote]


How you can't comprehend this is beyond me. Really, I'm dumbfounded how you are still saying the first event was the players fault when clearly the first event happened 2 years ago with the opting out of the CBA.


At this point, you aren't even being remotely logical or sticking to the facts. You are just using portions of the events to fill in your stance supporting the owners.


Courts close at 5pm bro. I know there was a show called "Night Court", but none exist that i know of.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

^Perhaps I'm not getting it. Because both parties could not come to an agreement I was under the impression for atleast the last few yrs both sides have been working under an agreed upon earlier CBA, ie; the 2006 CBA. The reason the owners would have let the CBA expire a couple of months ago was because they felt it was a more player friendly CBA and they want a more even keel CBA. The players don't want to give that up.

In any event it was my understanding that both sides agreed to work under the 2006 CBA in order to keep football going and give them more time to negotiate. So although I'm not "getting it" I was pretty sure there was a CBA for which the players decertified 6 hrs prior to the deadline of an agreed upon deadline.

Again I could be wrong but I was pretty sure there was a CBA that both sides were playing under that both sides agreed to use up until about a couple of months ago when the players chose to decertify.

So your second excuse for the players is they had to file prior to 5pm? When technically they could have waited until the next day after the deadline? Good arguement. Although had they waited there probably would not be any issue's about whether they decertified illegally. I'm soo glad I'm just not getting "it".

People who point to the opt out moment are generally trying to deflect criticism away from the players. They tend to disregard that the opt out was a valid option for either side and agreed upon by both sides. If you call them on that, they will go to the unethical tv contracts, this is completely valid, except that the owners have been found guilty, and will face a triple damage punishment, tha brings us to the nflpa disclaimer, which has yet to have a final judgement of intent but doesn't pass a simple smell test. If the 8th district and NLRB both say it was valid, then I will not point to it, but at this point in time, that act of disclaiming with the purpose of subverting the 6month time period written into the CBA is, to me, the point where fault lays.

But rather than lay fault at this point both sides know what it takes to reach a deal, the NFL has put offers out there, somebody on the players side ought to get a response back to the owners, so that everyone can get moving forward to a final solution.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

Holy crap! I was right...

[url=http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81e80385/article/lockout-block-union-seeks-to-decertify-before-cba-expires]NFL.com news: Lockout block? Union seeks to decertify before CBA expires[/url]

[QUOTE]If the union does decertify, the plan in place is to do so prior to the expiration of the CBA at 11:59 p.m. ET on March 3, absent any breakthrough in talks. The union would then seek an injunction to block a potential lockout.
[/QUOTE]

But here's the problem with them waiting....

[QUOTE]The NFLPA would take this course of action to ensure the injunction goes before Judge David Doty, who's jurisdiction over this case ends on March 3. [B]If the NFLPA waited until after the expiration of the CBA, the union would have to wait six months to decertify.[/B][/QUOTE]

The Union didn't want to have to wait 6 months. OFW.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

Leverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverageLeverage leverage leverage leverage

TNT I'M DYNAMITE!

[url=http://phinphanatic.com/2011/05/25/league-loses-leverage-from-within-coaches-revolting/]League Loses Leverage From Within? Coaches Revolting? « Phin Phanatic | A Miami Dolphins blog[/url]

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

I see this as a stalemate. Did not a second contingient of players file a suit also? A break in the ranks of the players? So all that has happened is a break in the ranks of the owners. To me... screams of tie. Just because this is the latest news does not make the opposite side a winner in the leverage game.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;804545]I see this as a stalemate. Did not a second contingient of players file a suit also? A break in the ranks of the players? So all that has happened is a break in the ranks of the owners. To me... screams of tie. Just because this is the latest news does not make the opposite side a winner in the leverage game.[/quote]

I wasn't saying either way rather I'm simply tired of the players (and some of the owners) obsession with obtaining leverage.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;804540]People who point to the opt out moment are generally trying to deflect criticism away from the players. They tend to disregard that the opt out was a valid option for either side and agreed upon by both sides. If you call them on that, they will go to the unethical tv contracts, this is completely valid, except that the owners have been found guilty, and will face a triple damage punishment, tha brings us to the nflpa disclaimer, which has yet to have a final judgement of intent but doesn't pass a simple smell test. If the 8th district and NLRB both say it was valid, then I will not point to it, but at this point in time, [B]that act of disclaiming with the purpose of subverting the 6month time period written into the CBA is, to me, the point where fault lays. [/B]

But rather than lay fault at this point both sides know what it takes to reach a deal, the NFL has put offers out there, [B]somebody on the players side ought to get a response back to the owners[/B], so that everyone can get moving forward to a final solution.[/quote]

In regards to the 1st para, it doesn't matter who has "leverage", if the players are found to have decertified illegally (which I think will happen) then the owners hold the leverage.

but in regards to the 2nd para, no matter who holds leverage both sides need to get an agreement which means sitting at a table and agreeing on a new CBA and signing it. You can't work on anything if only one party is throwing out offers and the other side does not respond or does not throw out counter offers. As you said both sides can have fingers pointed at them, but they need to negotiate and that can't be done by just one side.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

Don't know if this has been posted yet but I think it would be hilarious to see Shanahan put Snyder through an OTA.
[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/25/the-next-frontier-in-lockout-boredom-rams-hold-mock-ota/]The next frontier in lockout boredom: Rams hold “Mock OTA” | ProFootballTalk[/url]

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;804548]I wasn't saying either way rather I'm simply tired of the players (and some of the owners) obsession with obtaining leverage.[/quote]

Misunderstood sorry. I too am tired of the whole "leverage" issue. Who the "F" cares? the players thought they would get leverage by decertifying. Did it work? no, the owners lockedout. Did the owners gain any leverage by locking out? no.

How will getting leverage from the courts help in the specifics of a new CBA? I keep hearing that the courts can't instruct what gets put in or taken out of the CBA. They can only determine if either party broke the law. So basically the whole court issues are a smoke screen to take attention away from the sitting down and hashing out an agreement.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;804553]Misunderstood sorry. I too am tired of the whole "leverage" issue. Who the "F" cares? the players thought they would get leverage by decertifying. Did it work? no, the owners lockedout. Did the owners gain any leverage by locking out? no.

How will getting leverage from the courts help in the specifics of a new CBA? I keep hearing that the courts can't instruct what gets put in or taken out of the CBA. They can only determine if either party broke the law. So basically the whole court issues are a smoke screen to take attention away from the sitting down and hashing out an agreement.[/quote]

Funny thing about leverage is you loose some when it becomes obvious that you're desperately chasing after it. In retrospect the only thing leverage wise that I have no problem with is the NFLPA going after the Owners rainy day fund with the TV Contracts.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;804552]Don't know if this has been posted yet but I think it would be hilarious to see Shanahan put Snyder through an OTA.
[URL="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/05/25/the-next-frontier-in-lockout-boredom-rams-hold-mock-ota/"]The next frontier in lockout boredom: Rams hold “Mock OTA” | ProFootballTalk[/URL][/quote]

lol. I can hear it know

MS- "Ok so you have to go up and back 4 times in oder to pass."
DS- "This is BS, I'm a millionair."
MS- "So is Haynesworth."
DS- "Ok, I finished 2 I gotta go to the bathroom."
MS- "Well you took too long in the bathroom so you have to start over."
DS- "I finished the test. I think I'm going to sue you for defamation of character."

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;804557]Funny thing about leverage is you loose some when it becomes obvious that you're desperately chasing after it. In retrospect the only thing leverage wise that I have no problem with is the NFLPA going after the Owners rainy day fund with the TV Contracts.[/quote]

Yeah I really didn't pay attention to the whole TV deal and out of the blue people were calling foul. As long as it's counted in as NFL income and it's part of what the players will get, then I don't see the problem because in the long run the players are going to see part of that money also. But if it's exclusively money for the owners but should be for the players also then I can see the arguement.

Which I'm guessing is the issue. I think it's funny how it's business as usual for the NFL all except for when it comes to players. and even then some of us would be idiots to think the teams are not having some kind of contact with their players. Yet the NFL just recently looked into it and ... what do you know... no violations. lol.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;804560]lol. I can hear it know

MS- "Ok so you have to go up and back 4 times in oder to pass."
DS- "This is BS, I'm a millionair."
MS- "So is Haynesworth."
DS- "Ok, I finished 2 I gotta go to the bathroom."
MS- "Well you took too long in the bathroom so you have to start over."
DS- "I finished the test. I think I'm going to sue you for defamation of character."[/quote]

I think I could figure out the itnerary.

Drill 1 - Signing checks then resting
Drill 2 - Read a critical article without suing
Drill 3 - Charging less then $200 for beverages.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;804565]I think I could figure out the itnerary.

Drill 1 - Signing checks then resting
Drill 2 - Read a critical article without suing
Drill 3 - Charging less then $200 for beverages.[/quote]

lol. What happens if DS refuses to do a drill? lol. What happens if DS is seen laying on the field reading the critical article?

Drill 4- putting a credit card into a cheerleaders top with out touching boobage.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SBXVII;804569]lol. What happens if DS refuses to do a drill? lol. What happens if DS is seen laying on the field reading the critical article?

[B]Drill 4- putting a credit card into a cheerleaders top with out touching boobage.[/B][/quote]

That's actually part of the NFL sex offender OTAs led by Big Ben and Fal Al. LOL.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;804540]People who point to the opt out moment are generally trying to deflect criticism away from the players. .[/quote]


The opt out was brought up because somebody actually thinks the players started the "first event" in all this with the decertification. He's talking about the owners suing the players for something "they've" done. It's ****ing retarded when you think about what started this whole fiasco and it sure wasn't the players.


I'll make this simple so even a cave man can understand.


If the owners didn't opt out of the 2006 CBA, would we even be having this discussion? Any answer other than NO is a clear sign of a person's intelligence level and I refuse to go any further with this. The owners event started this whole thing. End of story. Now, if you want to argue the merits of the players impact on this ordeal, that's one thing. If you want to argue the players haven't cooperated, that's one thing. What isn't up for debate is the players starting it. At that point, you are simply trolling.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

^ So to help out my ignorant butt some more your saying the Owners and Players have been working together with out a CBA for 4 yrs? Because the Owners opted out in 2006.

Yet apparently I'm not the only individual to "not get it." Because the media doesn't either.....

[url=http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81e80385/article/lockout-block-union-seeks-to-decertify-before-cba-expires]NFL.com news: Lockout block? Union seeks to decertify before CBA expires[/url]

[QUOTE]If the union does decertify, [B]the plan in place is to do so prior to the expiration of the CBA at 11:59 p.m. ET on March 3[/B], absent any breakthrough in talks. The union would then seek an injunction to block a potential lockout.[/QUOTE]

In case your wondering the story was written Feb 26, 2011. Please enlighten me ole smart one as to how the Owners (who should be at fault) opted out of the CBA in 2006, which would mean there is no CBA, and be able to opt out yet again in 2011? Better yet how could the Players decertify now 4yrs after the owners opted out and yet still be filing prior to the expiration of the CBA.

Last I knew if either party opted out then the CBA was no longer in effect. Yet both sides have been working under a CBA? Yes they have been working under the 2006 CBA which was agreed upon and extended by both parties agreeing to have it extended until they both could agree on a new one.

The owners may have opted out as you put it but they have been working under the very CBA they opted out of. and .... it expired on March 3rd at midnight.

What I don't think some other non informed individuals get is the 2006 CBA that the owners and players were working under all the way up until March 3rd ..... [B]COULD HAVE BEEN EXTENDED[/B]. Except the players [B]chose to decertify prior to the deadline of the expiration.[/B]

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

OMG, if you read the article it says that very thing.....

[QUOTE]At this point there are four likely scenarios that would take place March 4: a new deal is struck, [B]the sides opt to extend the negotiating period[/B], the union decertifies or the owners vote for a lockout.[/QUOTE]

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

Talk about totally misreading what NC wrote. He didn't say the owners opted out in 2006. He said they opted out of the 2006 deal. The 2006 deal gave either the option to opt out a year or two before the deal expired, an option the owners exercised in 2008

[url=http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80868b78&template=without-video&confirm=true]NFL owners opt out of CBA[/url]

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SmootSmack;804602]Talk about totally misreading what NC wrote. He didn't say the owners opted out in 2006. He said they opted out of the 2006 deal. The 2006 deal gave either the option to opt out a year or two before the deal expired, an option the owners exercised in 2008

[URL="http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80868b78&template=without-video&confirm=true"]NFL owners opt out of CBA[/URL][/quote]


Ok totally wrong sorry. Misread. But although they opted out did they not extend the 2006 CBA each year in order to reach an agreement? or were they simply playing under the 2006 CBA but did not actually have a CBA in place due to the owners opting out.

In any event the owners might have "opted out" in 2006 but they have been trying to get a new one in place. In other words if both sides had the option to "opt out" then either side could have done it. Legally. Now if the side who opted out ... also chose not to work out an agreement I'd be pointing fingers, except thats not whats happened. The owners have been showing up at all meetings, they have offered 2 CBA offers, Both the players walked away from with out even a counter offer, players decertify (possibly illegally which is where the finger pointing should start), owners lockedout, mediation, and 8th Circuit upholding the lockout but asking the owners to, yet again, send the players, yet again, another CBA offer, which was, yet again not counter offered.

I understand the owners and players are most likely talking about the issue's but... it should not stop the players from taking whatever offer the owners hand to them and making the adjustments they would like to see happen and sending the offer (on paper) back to the owners.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

They played under the 2006 CBA with the knowledge, since 2008, that if no new agreement was reached prior to this March the CBA they had agreed to would be void since the owners chose to opt out.

And the owners have rejected proposals from the players since last spring

[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/03/sports/football/03nfl.html]N.F.L. Owners Reject Players’ Bid to Extend Current Agreement - NYTimes.com[/url]

[url=http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2011/01/Jan-18/Leagues-and-Governing-Bodies/NFLPA.aspx]NFLPA Made Proposals To NFL On How To Split Revenues - SportsBusiness Daily | SportsBusiness Journal[/url]

[url=http://www.sbnation.com/2010/7/1/1547574/rookie-salary-cap-nfl-nflpa-proven-performance-plan]NFLPA's Proven Performance Plan Would Shorten Rookie Contracts, Distribute Savings - SBNation.com[/url]

And as far as the owners showing up at all meetings

[url=http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-disrespectedunion031111]Business matter became personal for union - NFL - Yahoo! Sports[/url]

[QUOTE]Yet from the players’ perspective, control is very much at the heart of this fight, and it has been since the owners unanimously voted to opt out of the CBA in 2008, a mere two years after they’d agreed to an extension.

From that point on, owners embarked upon a not-so-subtle strategy to “take back our league,” as enunciated by the Carolina Panthers’ Jerry Richardson to his peers last March. They were fully prepared to lock out the players until a decision by U.S. District Court Judge David Doty imperiled the uninterrupted television payments on which they’d been counting derailed their plans.

That was last Tuesday, two days before the CBA was set to expire. And while Doty’s ruling motivated the owners to try to cut a deal – and the union twice agreed to short-term extensions in an effort to come to terms – Smith and his fellow negotiators continued to chafe over what they believed was a pattern of disrespect from the other side.

First, there was Richardson’s condescending treatment of Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning(notes), former NFL player Sean Morey(notes) and other union negotiators during a Feb. 5 bargaining session. Shortly thereafter, owners abruptly canceled a planned five-hour bargaining session, apparently because they were angry over the union’s characterization of a hypothetical economic model.

Even after federal mediator George Cohen began presiding over the sessions, union negotiators thought they were being shined on by the league, as most or all of the owners were absent from the bulk of the meetings. Finally, last Wednesday – the day after Doty’s decision – 10 executives from the league’s labor management committee showed up for the talks at the FMCS building. They left to join the rest of the league’s owners at a meeting 25 miles away in Chantilly, Va., and Smith and other union negotiators were under the impression that those owners would return for the next round of discussions.

Instead, the union leaders learned that those owners, including the Dallas Cowboys’ Jerry Jones and the New England Patriots’ Robert Kraft, had flown home on private planes, leaving only two members of the league’s labor committee (New York Giants owner John Mara and Green Bay Packers president Mark Murphy) to attend Thursday’s crucial session.

Even after negotiating a pair of extensions, the league’s negotiating team showed up this past Monday without displaying a sense of urgency. On Thursday afternoon – with Friday’s deadline looming – Smith and other union negotiators left the FMCS building and walked back to NFLPA headquarters. They were told by Cohen to expect a call before 4:30 p.m., at which point they’d be summoned to return for another session of talks.

The union officials waited as 4:30 arrived, then 5, but the call never came. Finally, Atallah learned via a reporter’s post on Twitter that the owners who’d been in attendance were on a conference call with the rest of the league’s owners.

Said Atallah: “I turned to De and said, ‘Oh, that’s funny – we were supposed to be over there right now. “He said, ‘Are you serious?’ At 6:15 we called the mediator’s office, and he told us, ‘Well, they’re packing up to go, so we’re not doing anything tonight.’ And then we heard they all went to dinner.”[/QUOTE]

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

Let me ask this and perhaps NC will be happy after....

Both side have a contract. In 2006 both sides could opt out if they didn't like the contract. The owners opted out because they didn't like a specific part or perhaps a couple specific parts of the contract. BUT.... both sides agreed to keep working under the very contract until a new one could be agreed upon.

So if I've supposedly seen the light, what should the owners have done if they didn't like parts of the contract? over look it and sign the deal and keep working under a contract they don't like? This would have made the owners saints? Instead they chose to opt out of the contract in order to work out a new deal which would be more to their liking (which by the way is not illegal) and now it's all their fault? I presume had the players done this in 06 we would be pointing fingers at the players right?

The owners opted out but agreed to keep working under the very agreement they didn't like in order to facilitate a new agreement. Shame on the owners. Yet the players who are finally frustrated that they are getting money taken away decided to not sit at the table for the final 6 hrs, decided to not extend the 06 agreement in order to keep business as usual, and chose to decertify early in order to "have leverage" (as D.Smith put it) illegally.

Had the players not decertified and agreed to an extention there might not have been raised tickets prices, raised jersey prices, employees having pay cuts, etc. etc.

Forget it. Whatever. Still goes back to there's not counter offers and the players keep talking about June 3rd or June 6th. Not about sitting down this week and trying to hammer something out.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

Wow, I miss football more than ever right about now.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=Mattyk;804609]Wow, I miss football more than ever right about now.[/quote]

You and me both

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

NC_Skins, without getting into it too far, since 2 big guys here are sick of it :cheeky-sm

if the owners hadn't opted out, we would be at this same place just 2 years later. Opting out was legal and in the spirit of the CBA. Leaving bargaining 6 hours early to disclaim interest and avoid the constructs written into the CBA in case it expires. I see a difference if you don't nothing I say will change it.

One other point, and I think this is fair, but also certainly speculative. Shortly after the owners opted out, Gene Upshaw died, and the whole system got thrown into a bit of a chaotic state for a while, and by the time it resolved both sides were set in their strategies. Had he not been taken away as he was, even if he retired, perhaps the transitions and plans may have been more steadied. The owners couldn't un-opt out to give more time to DSmith et al to get some ground under their feet and get a feel for NFL labor relations.

Oh well, we are where we are, and all sides are pretty unyielding (IMO)

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

Interesting:
[url=http://nfllabor.com/2011/05/09/if-it%e2%80%99s-a-history-lesson-you-want%e2%80%a6/]NFLLabor.com If it’s a history lesson you want… «[/url]

[url=http://nfllabor.com/2011/04/05/fact-check-demaurice-smith-at-the-university-of-virginia%e2%80%99s-darden-school-of-business/]NFLLabor.com FACT CHECK: DeMaurice Smith at the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business «[/url]

^[QUOTE]FACT: The NFL publicly released its proposal to the players on March 11. We offered to show the union five years (2005-2009) of year-by-year league-wide operating profits based on audited club reports reviewed and confirmed by Deloitte & Touche. We offered to show the union the number of clubs that had declines in operating profits from 2005-2009, and by how much on a cumulative basis, again based on audited financial statements. We offered the NFLPA the ability to review Deloitte’s work. We also offered to give five years (2005-2009) of audited individual club financial statements to a third-party accounting firm to verify for the union the profitability data provided to the union. And there were no conditions put on the information offered, meaning that they could have asked for more. But the union’s concern was giving up its public relations position. As linebacker Hunter Hillenmeyer wrote in an NBC Chicago blog post on April 1,[B] “It’s true, the NFL did offer some financial info towards the end of mediation. We rejected it, not because nothing is better than something, which it is not, but because the perception would then be that we got what we needed.”[/B]
[/QUOTE]

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

Whats with the lies? Is it a strategy for court?

[url=http://nfllabor.com/2011/05/18/fact-check-the-nfl-is-not-suing-anybody/]NFLLabor.com FACT CHECK: The NFL is not suing anybody «[/url]

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=Ruhskins;804474]About time this happened...

"RT @judybattista NFL coaches association filed amicus brief in support of players, asking 8th Circuit to affirm injunction and lift lockout."

I'm curious how the owners will fell about this.[/quote]

Interesting note in this article that Kubiak and Del Rio have apparently been given ultimatums to make the playoffs. I mean, we've all speculated it but never really had an inclination that it was official

[url=http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/29569952]NFL Coaches Association brief: 'End the lockout' - CBSSports.com[/url]

In other related news: One team (maybe the only team) whose coaches chose to side with the owners and not associated themselves with the amicus brief was the Redskins

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SmootSmack;804665]Interesting note in this article that Kubiak and Del Rio have apparently been given ultimatums to make the playoffs. I mean, we've all speculated it but never really had an inclination that it was official

[url=http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/29569952]NFL Coaches Association brief: 'End the lockout' - CBSSports.com[/url]

[B]In other related news: One team (maybe the only team) whose coaches chose to side with the owners and not associated themselves with the amicus brief was the Redskins[/B][/quote]

Ironically, we are one of the teams that is significantly affected by the lockout. If there is a season next year, I wonder if the owners will take this lockout in consideration as they decide to fire coaches of teams that haven't performed well.

Re: 8th Circuit Court Grants Stay, Lockout Continues
 

[quote=SmootSmack;804665]Interesting note in this article that Kubiak and Del Rio have apparently been given ultimatums to make the playoffs. I mean, we've all speculated it but never really had an inclination that it was official

[url=http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/29569952]NFL Coaches Association brief: 'End the lockout' - CBSSports.com[/url]

In other related news: One team (maybe the only team) whose coaches chose to side with the owners and not associated themselves with the amicus brief was the Redskins[/quote]I understand that it's more important now than before for the owners to do everything they can to conserve money, but if you have to make an ultimatum to your head coach to make the playoffs or lose his job, he probably shouldn't start the season as coach.